Graaf,
Sorry you take offense at my opinion.
I have no idea what you believe to be accurate reproduction of recorded music.
My concept of accurate reproduction is a system that reproduces music as close as possible to how it sounded when recorded and mixed down.
I have never heard of any mix engineers that use omni speakers for mix down, there are many good reasons why they are not used for critical listening.
Additional reverberation and comb filtering not in the original recording caused by mid and high frequency reflecting off back and side walls reduces coherency and accuracy of the reproduced recorded signal in the very frequency range the ears are most sensitive to those problems.
Those problems can be avoided by using speakers with directionality, making for more accurate reproduction of recorded music.
There is enough wrong with loudspeakers to start with, adding room reflections makes those problems worse.
Room reflections can mask speaker system problems.
There is nothing wrong with you or anyone else liking the "extra sauce" of multiple arrival times, I prefer to minimize, rather than increase reflections.
If I want to hear reflections from all around the room, I go whole hog and play music through a Leslie speaker, it adds FM and AM too
.Art
but what You say is oversimplification, at best
have You read Toole's "Sound Reproduction: The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers and Rooms"?
http://www.amazon.com/Sound-Reproduction-Acoustics-Psychoacoustics-Loudspeakers/dp/0240520092
Me too.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/blogs/planet10/493-fall-listening-space.html
Omnis (at least bipoles) work well in my room -- actually almost any decent speaker does.
dave
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/blogs/planet10/493-fall-listening-space.html
Omnis (at least bipoles) work well in my room -- actually almost any decent speaker does.
dave
Oversimplification of what ?
Adding extra reverb by using an omni speaker reflecting off walls (and ceilings and floors if truly omni) is a fairly simple concept.
I am old enough to remember people using spring reverbs in home and even car applications. Now, many cheap and cheerful receivers have built in "concert hall" reverb and such.
Psychoacoustically, some people prefer these "enhancements" even though inaccurate, in that they add something not present in the recording.
You seem to be, to put it simply, one of those people.
Nothing wrong with that, but for me, I simply prefer to hear the reverberant field as recorded, with as little additional stuff as possible.
I'm sure I could go find some spare drivers in the basement and turn my mains into a battlecruiser of driver weaponry, bristling with drivers pointing this way and that, but I'm less likely to listen to it than I would be if I glued mirrors all around my television to make the picture bigger.
of complicated question of effects of reflections in a listening room
what do you mean by reverb? Do You really mean something like "concert hall" reverb?
in that case are You aware of the difference between "concert hall" reverb and reflections in a listening room?
well, once again things are not as they seem to be
me too, me too, would You believe?
perhaps when some conditions are met there is simply no additional stuff that could cover what is recorded?
Art,
I agree with your definition of accurate sound reproduction but common 2 channel and even multichannel reproduction systems lack the sensation of "spaciousness" as defined in psychoacoustics. Spaciousness adds realism to the perceived sound and some people prioritize that over features multichannel can be good at (e.g. pinpoint localization or transparency). Omnis can add spaciousness but in a very uncontrolled manner (because every room is different). It would be desirable that the recording could control aural aspects like spaciousness but we don't have an adequate sound reproduction system nor do we really know how it should look like. Some people feel that dipoles are right, some feel adding speakers at 60° is right but all of that is just speculation not hard facts.
is your statement based on personal experience, speculation, logic, or heresay ?
my ribbon super tweeter gives 'spationess' to the whole system
is that a problem too ?
is it a proven fact that reflections are worse with omni polar ?
or based on ?
I accept logic, but is it a proven fact ?
even if it really does work that way with 99% of all omni polar
does this mean it can never be different ?
a bit like compression drivers, or any other pro speaker
always said to be no good for hifi
but today they seem to be ok, if designed properly
Not sure why you're asking but one looked like this:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Another one like that:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last one was best in terms of spaciousness when properly set up.
It was tongue-in-cheek.
My understanding is pretty simple. The topic of the thread is "why aren't they more popular?" A few folks have tried to illustrate reasons "why."
Lots of you have made arguments advocating omni designs, but what you've forgotten to do is help us to understand why you think they are unpopular. You're telling us they are great, but when dismissing or countering our arguments, you forget the most important part, which is what you think the real reason is that they are unpopular.
A few folks have tried to illustrate reasons "why."
the theory about why they are no good is a 30year old song, or more
its like a rap song on repeat
Lots of you have made arguments advocating omni designs
I haven't noticed any of that at all
a scientist said that science is about curiosity
looking at things not yet understood
once its understood and proven, its no longer science
it then becomes engineering
curiosity is driving the world, and always have been
but also money, for sure
and a reason why very few likes to explore things that noone wants to buy
a lot of good stuff is on hold because of that